credit_ratings

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'Get credit ratings' with no mention of whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned (e.g., ratings from specific agencies), pagination, rate limits, or any side effects. This is minimal and does not enrich the agent's understanding beyond the tool's basic function.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and object. There is no redundant or superfluous text, making it efficient and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It does not hint at the response structure, the need to first obtain an ID via 'credit_search', or any other prerequisite. For a tool with one parameter, it is functional but lacks the context an agent may need to invoke it correctly within a workflow.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already documents the 'id' parameter as 'Organization ID from search results', which is clear and has 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter—only restating 'by ID'. Since the schema handles the semantics, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('credit ratings') scoped by 'specific organization by ID'. It effectively distinguishes itself from the sibling 'credit_search' (which would search for organizations) by implying this tool fetches ratings for a known ID, but it does not explicitly name that alternative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The parameter schema notes the ID comes from 'search results', implying a predecessor search step, but the description itself does not mention prerequisites, such as first using 'credit_search', nor does it state when not to use this tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.